D810 need your thoughts between thsee 2 lenses for it.

matchman

Senior Member
The general lens forum seams dead.
The Sigma ART 24-105 new for $900
Or a Nikon refurbished 24-120 for $550.
I know the sigma is sharper in lab tests.
But in real world use is it $350 better than nikon?
 

RocketCowboy

Senior Member
What are your primary subjects you're shooting with the D810? Do you need the larger aperture of the Sigma ART, or are you going to be stopped down for landscapes anyway?

I haven't used that Sigma before, but do love my 24-120mm/f4 as a general purpose/walk-about lens. There are a lot of other Sigma ART lenses on my list, but the 24-105 hadn't made it on my radar.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
That is an excellent price for a refurbished Nikon 24-120mm f/4. Nikon's refurbished price is $899.96.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-p...nikkor-24-120mm-f%2f4g-ed-vr-refurbished.html

The price you listed is even less than the cost of many used ones. Adorama has a used one listing for $614.

Nikon 24-120mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S VR II Vibration Reduction Nikkor Lens 2193

That said, generally a new lens will come with a much longer warranty than a refurbished or used lens.

I have a very good copy of the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 that I bought new. It is stellar--I compared three copies of this lens, and this one was by far the sharpest. The Sigma Art series are known for their sharpness so no doubt it is an excellent lens, too.

Sorry I can't say which I'd buy, but both of your suggestions have their advantages.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Forgot to mention something important to consider...there has been a lot of discussion that newer Nikon bodies aren't compatible with older Sigma (and possibly other third party) lenses. Some Nikonites have had to ship some of their Sigma lenses back to Sigma for firmware updates. It's as if Nikon is intentionally trying to make consumers stay with brand lenses.

This Sigma lens might be able to be connected to a Sigma dock to obtain firmware updates. If so, you need to factor in the cost of the dock, too, especially down the road when you upgrade to a newer Nikon body that hasn't yet been released.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
The general lens forum seams dead.
The Sigma ART 24-105 new for $900
Or a Nikon refurbished 24-120 for $550.
I know the sigma is sharper in lab tests.
But in real world use is it $350 better than nikon?
First off, comparing the price of a factory new lens to that of a refurb seems a little like stacking the deck; bought new, the Nikon 24-120mm is a $1,200 lens.

If you want to know which lens is sharper, it's the Sigma. Hands down.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
One more difference I just noticed is that the front filter of the Sigma is 82mm while the Nikon is 77mm. Do you currently have any 77mm filters? Some 82mm filters do come in at a higher price than their 77mm counterparts. Just a thought to consider....
 

matchman

Senior Member
Thanks for the replies.
Filters are not a issue. Ide like to consider a refurbished sigma but I cannot find the 24-105 art anywhere as a refurb.
I currently have a sigma 150-600 with dock. Also have a
50mm 1.8G nikon. I need a general use lense such as this nikon.
Im mostly a outdoor/nature shooter .I need the general walkabout lense.
The nikon lense has a 1yr warranty (90 day +Cameta camera extends it)
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
Thanks for the replies.
Filters are not a issue. Ide like to consider a refurbished sigma but I cannot find the 24-105 art anywhere as a refurb.
I currently have a sigma 150-600 with dock. Also have a
50mm 1.8G nikon. I need a general use lense such as this nikon.
Im mostly a outdoor/nature shooter .I need the general walkabout lense.
The nikon lense has a 1yr warranty (90 day +Cameta camera extends it)

If like you said that you just need a general walkabout lens, I would get the 24-120 especially for that price. Even if you don't like it, you can sell it for at least what you paid for it.
 

RocketCowboy

Senior Member
One more difference I just noticed is that the front filter of the Sigma is 82mm while the Nikon is 77mm. Do you currently have any 77mm filters? Some 82mm filters do come in at a higher price than their 77mm counterparts. Just a thought to consider....

Another good point! That's one of the big grips about the new Nikon 24-70mm/f2.8 VR lens, is that it moved from 77mm to 82mm and a new set of filters for some.
 

AlfredZ

New member
Sigma Art lenses are excellent. I recently bought a 70-200 f2.8 Nikon lens and if there had of been an equivalent in the Sigma Art series it would have been a simple choice. Sigma Art lenses are as good in most respects to the top Nikon lenses and a lot cheaper.
Alfred
 

PT73

New member
I just got a new 'cheap' (£1830) D810 and Sigma 24-105 F4 (£599). A little heavy, but the photos are worth it.

The lens isn't weather sealed, so I carry a weatherproof bag.

Have only done the in-camera focus calibration so far (+16).

Handheld photos:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5QeLNIEbIYVaEpXbzd5OHplLTg
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5QeLNIEbIYVR2lLejY0YUhzNlU
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5QeLNIEbIYVNzdUdFdSdGw5M1k
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5QeLNIEbIYVakY1LXJpZHhrMVU
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5QeLNIEbIYVeUd1aDhiZk56ZDg
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5QeLNIEbIYVSkdKSnRzekJzZ0k
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5QeLNIEbIYVZzZPNWhvNzhSc1E

All shot raw only (saw bad noise on in-camera jpeg, at least at ISO 800), cropped to 16:9 in Lightroom 5.7, with Lens correction + CA removal, Vibrance +3, Saturation +6, Sharpness 50, Lum NR 0, Col NR approx 8.
Exported to JPEG (also to DNG) with no additional sharpening.

Paul
 
Top